If my own experiences are any gauge, the result of the infamous 2016 referendum and the period that followed have been anything but unifying and currently as a nation our trajectory is on course to create a dis-United Kingdom. As a patriot I detest this direction of travel and am equally sickened by the economic, geopolitical, and ethical destruction of our once proud country. On a micro level I have lost count of the people I have defriended on Facebook, and those that have probably binned me for the same reason: BREXIT. When I pushed the likes of Gary, Nick, Paul, et al. for the benefits there was the inevitable breaking point of the now so familiar slap-downs – “Get over it!” “Remoaner!” ─ the curt distraction techniques that stifle debate. Turn this perception on its head ─ if you were arrested for a crime you didn’t commit would you simply tug your forelock and accept your fate without further protest? But had I simply got it wrong, and were the “sunlit uplands” ─ the phrase coined by leading BREXITEER Andrea Leadsom MP ─ within our collective grasp? The only way to make sense of this dilemma was to do what I do best and let my curiosity lead the way.
The central claim of the leave campaign was a barefaced lie. How can I be so cocksure of this assertion? Can a con have conviction, even if the morals are a little flaky? Consider the following basic year one undergraduate law student fodder: our constitution is built upon parliamentary supremacy ─ the notion of ultimate ruling over everyone and everything. The oft-cited simple illustration is that if the UK parliament were so minded, they could pass a law making it an offence to be French in France. Thus, our nation would never ever be in a position where it had to “Take back control” since it could never lose it. Even the government agreed, announcing in the policy paper titled ‘The United Kingdom’s exit from, and new partnership with, the European Union’ (May 2017) ─ item 2.1 ─ “The sovereignty of Parliament is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution. Whilst Parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU, it has not always felt like that.” To the majority of voters it no doubt did feel that way, fuelled by a relentless media campaign. If you are so inclined, do some further investigative work, see who owns the BREXIT supporting newspapers and news channels. Visit the places they call home, although don’t forget to book a return flight. As for social media, seek out the reliable references to the Russia report. It’s a matter of fact that this regime tried to steal our COVID-19 vaccine research data. Would they have dared use the cyber highway to interfere with the referendum too? What advantage would there be to Russia to have a weakened EU whose central principle is maintaining peace?
If you were sucked in by the con, then please don’t be too upset. You have joined a not so exclusive club. The wonderfully worded case ─ Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1 – is the leading English contract law ruling. I knew that my hours of study would come in handy one day! In a nutshell, the company claimed that their invention would cure influenza and several other related diseases. Indeed, the claim was supported by the guarantee of £100 compensation if illness befell any purchaser (in today’s money this is around £160,000). What a surprise that this was a scam! Oh, by the way, none of you were actually taken in by the similarly bogus claim on the side of the Boris bus were you?
At this juncture I was nonetheless stumped. I had, more or less, reached the ‘how’ this had happened, but I couldn’t fathom out the ‘why.’ As I pondered this I emailed the Cabinet Office requesting an interview with The Rt. Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg, Minister for Brexit Opportunities and Government Efficiency, receiving an immediate and courteous reply that I may receive a response within twenty days. I was on a mission of discovery and I couldn’t wait that long, so I made a call, then another, and was eventually signposted to a further point of reference. Someone with political nous. Bingo! I called Chris and laid out my evidence trail. Agreeing to talk, they nonetheless had a busy schedule to keep.
Chris listened intently and when I came up for air asked me a simple question – “In a word, how would you describe the outcome of BREXIT?” I had a pent up barrage of sentences to reflect my unease, but nevertheless I rose to the challenge – chaos.
“Good,” was the calm response. “That’s the whole point of BREXIT. But before I continue could we please return to your legal arguments?” I nodded.
“The general public aren’t interested in the nuances of the law. Lawyers love to show off by reciting famous cases. The rest of us just glaze over.”
“People are persuaded by the apparent rightness of a claim. The unscrupulous know this and use it to their advantage. The public don’t care about the truth. What they want to hear is something simple that appears to solve their problems. Repeat it over and over again. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t correspond to the facts. Just keep saying it and eventually most people will begin to believe it. The big lie is the easiest one to get away with.”
“Bernie Madoff, the former chair of New York’s Nasdaq stock exchange, swindled nearly five thousand people out of an estimated $50 billion in a Ponzi scheme. When convicted he admitted that it was just one big lie.”
I was gobsmacked. But hey, you can’t do this to a nation ─ the home of millions of people.
Chris smiled, “Nothing is impossible in the gullibility games, particularly if it is turbo-charged by a compliant media. Search the ‘big lie’ – you may be surprised.”
Okay, accepting that the Madoff principle could be duplicated at scale, who were the winners on a national scale? Chris wasn’t fazed.
“Let me initially circle back to your chaos assertion. Natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and tsunamis, create consequential and fertile investment opportunities. Reconstruction is profitable. But the key to ‘disaster capitalism’ is the inevitable disarray that follows. Whilst the world is distracted by the obvious human catastrophe corrupt administrations can create ‘emergency legislation’ that benefits wealthy investors, making it easier to profit from the crisis.”
What examples could Chris give?
“There are many. For example, prior to hurricane Katrina (August 29th, 2005) most New Orleans schools were in a state of disrepair, as was public housing. After the disaster the auctioning of the school system took place with military speed and precision. As for housing, it was reported that Richard Baker, a prominent Republican congressman, told a group of lobbyists, “We finally cleaned up public housing in New Orleans. We couldn’t do it, but God did.” Joseph Canizaro, one of the wealthiest developers, concurred. The 2004 tsunami in Sri Lanka was a similar story. Locals had lived on the beaches since time immemorial, but following newly enacted legislation they were barred from returning and the land was sold off for development. Tragedy and confusion equal an opportunity for the wealthy to become even richer.”
I got that, but how did this narrative relate to BREXIT? This wasn’t a force of nature. Chris continued, “Disasters can be created intentionally too. Wars and political unrest are good examples. The dubious grounds on which the invasion of Iraq was sanctioned, and the subsequent toppling of Saddam Hussein, led to massive opportunities for private enterprise, especially stateside. Further back in time, the 11th of September 1973 Chilean coup where Augusto Pinochet seized power is another compelling example.”
“Ironically, the money flows to those who caused the artificial disaster in the first place, whilst the grieving population are distracted by the ungiving chaos and loss around them. Of course, this type of engineered disaster needs a patsy – or in other words the hypothetical hurricane or tsunami. In my first example it was convenient to blame it on the unproven relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda following the attacks on the Twin Towers on September 11th, 2001. In the second, the bogeyman was the perceived threat of Marxism.”
Was Chris some form of guru on the principle of disaster capitalism, and if so how had he become so authoritative? Chris smiled.
“Like you I am curious. Often the ‘how’ is the easy piece. It’s the ‘why’ that many overlook. But I’m not taking credit for any for the theory. I suggest you read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, or as a starter watch the associated documentary.”
Returning to BREXIT I wondered if Chris could be any more specific on the question of ‘why’ and what happens next?
“BREXIT is a manufactured disaster. Looking at the economic shock, it’s twice as damaging as the pandemic and will continue to be so in the long term. It’s far from being ‘done’ and probably never will be. Since BREXIT relies on people being continually confused and side tracked the impact can be continually blamed on other patsies, for example the cost-of-living crisis. Okay, the war in Ukraine and recovering from COVID-19 are taking their toll, but I would draw your attention to Adam Posen, a former Bank of England policy maker, who recently said that 80% of Britain’s inflation problems stem from BREXIT.”
“The smoke and mirrors of BREXIT where the rule of law is no more than toilet paper, and de-regulation and privatisation occur at lightning speed, benefit only one section of society – the ultra-wealthy. The patsy was the EU, and the distraction was the fear of losing something that we never lost. And most of us cannot talk about it now because that would be unpatriotic to those who continue to believe in the fraud and those that profit from it in terms of money and power ─ usually flanked by union flags.”
So, what will we lose? Chris, as pragmatic as ever, continued in the same dulcet tone.
“Amongst other things, the freedoms that we once took for granted ─ food standards, employment rights and health, to name only a handful. I fear for the NHS, and our once prosperous outlook. We have become a pariah state, chaotic and confused ─ easy pickings for disaster capitalists.”
I wanted to probe Chris further, yet I recognised that our time was up. I would follow his signposting and if The Rt. Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg granted me a future audience I had a few more questions to pose to him too. But before Chris departed, I had one final question to ask – am I just a disgruntled remoaner? Chris smiled broadly.
“I am a writer too. I love alliteration and I would conclude by saying that’s much better than being a brain donor!”
Thanks to Chris I believe I am closer to discovering the ‘why’ even though it leads to a chilling conclusion. I take some comfort from the fact that, in time, even disasters return to a status-quo that benefits the majority and not the minority who Chris adjudged to be the real winners of the BREXIT bonanza.
Title photograph Photo by Dolapo Ayoade on Unsplash
© Ian Kirke 2022 Twitter @ianjkirke